Arkansas Democrats look to be an endangered species this election cycle. Sen. Blanche Lincoln trails several Republican opponents in polls, and moderate Reps. Marion Berry and Vic Snyder both chose to retire as they faced possible strong Republican challengers.

In a state where President Obama’s disapproval ratings top 60 percent, two House Democrats have already announced their retirements and Democratic Sen. Blanche Lincoln trails in the polls, Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe is nevertheless prospering. His approval ratings are through the roof and he hasn’t drawn a Republican challenger as he seeks a second term this year.

POLITICO sat down with Beebe at the winter meeting of the National Governors Association and asked him about his popularity in the polls, his views on health care reform, and Arkansas politics. Below is an edited version of the conversation.

Q: How is it that you seem to be thriving in a state that seems like the center of the Obama resistance?

A: I think there are a lot of places where folks are thriving, and a lot of governors are thriving. First of all, I think we’ve concentrated in Arkansas on two major themes, and I feel everything else will flow in a much better fashion if you get these two things right. First and foremost, education. I think the number one priority of state government…is education. And I liken it to the number one obligation of the federal government being protection of our people from all enemies foreign and domestic…

Commensurate with our emphasis on education is economic development. It doesn’t do any good to increase the quality of your output in education, increase the quality of your workforce…if all you’re going to do is educate them to go to Los Angeles or New York or Miami to get a good job…

We have a clear strategy. That helps. When the people understand what the clear strategy is and believe in the clear strategy, and can see results from that, they are more likely to give you the benefit of the doubt.

Q: Do you have concerns about pushing through health care reform through reconciliation?

A: I have concerns, but mine are not so much political concerns….We’ve got a problem in health care. I’m not one of those folks that believes, notwithstanding what polls say, that our health care is just fine, leave it alone. Having said that, with all due respect, I don’t think they really attacked the major problem, which is cost containment. The paradigm has to be shifted on the way we pay for the delivery of health care. And talking about public options and all that stuff really I think begs the question of the escalating cost of the delivery of health care…

I’m not being critical of the Congress, of the administration in terms of their heart and their motive. They’re trying to do something that they think is a problem, that there’s no question that there is a problem. I merely differ on the first step.

Q: So what would you do differently?

A: Fee for service, in my opinion, is not sustainable…And it’s not conducive to encouraging both quality and economy.

Q: But you don’t think it should be pushed through with reconciliation?

A: Politically, I’m not sure that’s very smart…You’re talking about even with or without pushing it through with reconciliation, if all they’re going to do is continue to do what they’ve been talking about without attacking the basic core problem of cost containment, then I’m not sure you get anything other than continued growth in the percent of our disposable income that has to go to health care. And that’s not solving the problem, in my opinion.

Q: What do you think is hurting Sen. Blanche Lincoln’s standing right now? Is it the health care debate? And why are you in a better position than her—is it that you’re a governor and she’s a senator?

A: That helps. I’m there every day. I get to see folks everyday. She has to be in Washington and doesn’t have the personal contact, and as I’ve already explained that’s a key ingredient…By its very nature, that’s very difficult to do if you’re a senator versus if you’re a governor.

Secondly, the issues that she’s having to deal with are not of her own making. Normally issues I deal with, I can set the agenda more appropriately than she can….So when you’re in a legislative body you get painted with a broader brush than if you’re in the executive branch where you really are in a better position to be responsible for your own fate.

Q: Has the White House or the DSCC reached out to you about running for that seat?

A: No. It wouldn’t do them any good, but no, they have not.

Q: Do you still think it’s a winnable seat for her?

A: She needs to get home and make contact with as many of the people as she possibly can, establish those kind or re-establish those personal relationships. She’s got a lot of money, she needs to spend it wisely to educate…Overall, telling folks the truth, even when it’s not what they want to hear, ultimately is a political reward. Because even when people don’t agree with you, if they believe you’re honest about it, a certain respect flows from that…

I think she needs to use some of that money that she has that’s been well publicized in terms of campaign contributions to tell the people the basis of why she’s making the decisions that she’s making and explain the issues in real terms, honest terms. Yes, I think it’s winnable and yes, I think she can win.

Q: How do you think the dynamics of the race changed when Republican Rep. John Boozman got in?

A: Not much. He’s a nice man…he doesn’t have much statewide impact currently outside of that 3rd congressional district because he hasn’t had any experience outside of that…He’ll certainly have a lot of money.

What those polls appear to be saying is, as much currently dissatisfaction with Sen. Lincoln as opposed to a groundswell of support for any of those other candidates. And here are what, eight or nine of them? And they are all over the board in terms of their history and what segments of the electorate they appeal to.

Q: What do you think is going to happen with Lt. Gov. Halter? We’ve heard he’s polling the race.

A: I don’t know.

Q: Have you spoken to him about it?

A: Oh no.

Q: Why is that?

A: I just haven’t.

Q: Why is that? Do you have a good relationship?

A: We’re cordial.

Q: Would it be to his advantage if he were endorsed by MoveOn.org?

A: It might help in some circles in a primary.

Q: What is the vibe you are feeling from voters in your state? It’s unique in that there are several House members retiring, a senator in deep trouble. There are lot of states where we see similar dynamics, but not quite like Arkansas. What are you hearing out there?

A: There’s some anger and fear. The tea party movement has a presence in Arkansas just as it does in every other state. The angst in Arkansas is directed at federal government, not the state. In fact, there is in my opinion, a strong feeling in the electorate that Arkansas is doing really well compared to the rest of the country. If you’re one of those people who’ve lost their job, you’re not doing well, and it’s be harder for you to embrace that, but generally speaking, people acknowledge and recognize this is the worst economic downturn we’ve seen in our lifetime….

I think there is a feeling in the electorate that they’re not happy with what’s going on nationally, but they feel comfortable with what’s going on in the state. I think a lot of that is really about money. And not just the economy, although that should be and is the number one issue. I think people are worried about the debt….

Q: It sounds like you think the tea party has legitimate concerns. Do you believe they’re a legitimate movement?

A: I didn’t go that far. Yes, there are legitimate concerns. In terms of a movement, I don’t know what that means…I don’t know that there’s a monolithic group called the tea party….

Q: So there are portions of the movement you think are legitimate but it’s too diverse and you can’t put a label on it?

A: Absolutely.

Q: Do you see a sort of an artificial or an astro-turf aspect to it?

A: No, I wouldn’t characterize it that way. What I’m really saying is that there are some elements of it that transcend being labeled tea party. And I don’t think that it’s coalesced into, in effect, a third-way yet…I see Republicans and Democrats and Independents who would never consider themselves tea party folks to be embracing some of the same concerns that the tea party movement embraces, such as spending without the money there to actually cover it. They’re worried about China, they’re worried about the national debt, they’re worried about their children, they’re worried about what the weak dollar really means in terms of what’s going to happen to ultimately to oil and to oil prices and what it means for our balance of trade. A lot of them don’t verbalize it in that fashion, but ultimately it gets back to the pocketbook. The economy is the number one issue right now…If they start to get that right on the federal level, a lot of these other things will take care of themselves too.

Q: In your discussions about the federal level, you haven’t mentioned the president’s name once. Does the president need to take a new approach?

A: I wouldn’t presume to tell him what kind of approach he should take. I’ve told you that if it were up to me, that in health care we’d be talking first about cost-containment. And overall, if we’re talking about where to place the majority of our emphasis right now, it’s on the economy.